17902 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 68 / Tuesday, April 10, 2007 / Notices 

Dated: April 2, 2007. 

Susan Parker Bodine, 

Assistant Administrator, Office of Solid Waste 

and Emergency Response. 

[FR Doc. E7–6616 Filed 4–9–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

[EPA–HQ–OW–2006–0958; FRL–8297–2] 

Expedited Approval of Test 

Procedures for the Analysis of 

Contaminants Under the Safe Drinking 

Water Act; Analysis and Sampling 

Procedures 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: This action announces the 

Environmental Protection Agency’s 

(EPA’s) intent to implement an 

expedited process for approving 

alternative testing methods for existing 

regulations for drinking water 

contaminants. The Safe Drinking Water 

Act (SDWA) authorizes EPA to approve 

the use of alternative testing methods 

through publication of a notice in the 

Federal Register instead of through 

rulemaking procedures. EPA plans to 

use this streamlined authority to make 

additional methods available for 

analyzing drinking water compliance 

and unregulated contaminant 

monitoring samples. This expedited 

approach will provide public water 

systems, laboratories, and primacy 

agencies with more timely access to new 

measurement techniques and greater 

flexibility in the selection of analytical 

methods, thereby reducing monitoring 

costs while maintaining public health 

protection. 

This notice requests comments on 

implementation aspects of the expedited 

method approval process. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before June 11, 2007. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–

OW–2006–0958, by one of the following 

methods: 

• www.regulations.gov: Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• E-mail: OW–Docket@epa.gov. 

• Fax: (202) 566–1749. 

• Mail: Water Docket, Environmental 

Protection Agency, Mailcode: 4101T, 

1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., 

Washington, DC 20460. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OW–2006–

0958. All comments received will be 

included in the public docket without 

change and may be made available 

online at www.regulations.gov, 

including any personal information 

provided, unless the comment includes 

information claimed to be Confidential 

Business Information (CBI) or other 

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Do not submit 

information that you consider to be CBI 

or otherwise protected through 

www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The 

www.regulations.gov Web site is an 

‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which 

means EPA will not know your identity 

or contact information unless you 

provide it in the body of your comment. 

If you send an e-mail comment directly 

to EPA without going through 

www.regulations.gov, your e-mail 

address will be automatically captured 

and included as part of the comment 

that is placed in the public docket and 

made available on the Internet. If you 

submit an electronic comment, EPA 

recommends that you include your 

name and other contact information in 

the body of your comment and with any 

disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA 

cannot read your comment due to 

technical difficulties and cannot contact 

you for clarification, EPA may not be 

able to consider your comment. 

Electronic files should avoid the use of 

special characters, any form of 

encryption, and be free of any defects or 

viruses. For additional information 

about EPA’s public docket visit the EPA 

Docket Center homepage at http:// 

www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm. 

For additional instructions on 

submitting comments, go to Section I.B 

of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

section of this document. 

Docket: All documents in the docket 

are listed in the www.regulations.gov 

index. Although listed in the index, 

some information is not publicly 

available, e.g., CBI or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, will be publicly 

available only in hard copy. Publicly 

available docket materials are available 

either electronically in 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the Water Docket, EPA/DC, EPA West, 

Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., 

NW., Washington DC. The Public 

Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 

4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

excluding legal holidays. The telephone 

number for the Public Reading Room is 

(202) 566–1744, and the telephone 

number for the Water Docket is (202) 

566–2426. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Patricia Snyder Fair, Technical Support 

Center, Office of Ground Water and 

Drinking Water (MS 140), 

Environmental Protection Agency, 26 

West Martin Luther King Drive, 

Cincinnati, OH 45268; telephone 

number: 513–569–7937; e-mail address: 

fair.pat@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. General Information 

A. Does This Action Apply to Me? 

This action itself does not impose any 

requirements on anyone. Instead, it 

notifies interested parties of EPA’s 

intent to implement an expedited 

approval process for alternative testing 

procedures used to measure 

contaminants in drinking water and 

seeks comments on options for 

implementing the process. 

B. What Should I Consider as I Prepare 

My Comments for EPA? 

1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit 

confidential business information to 

EPA through www.regulations.gov or email. Clearly mark the part or all of the 

information that you claim to be CBI. 

For CBI information in a disk or CD 

ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the 

outside of the disk or CD ROM as CBI 

and then identify electronically within 

the disk or CD ROM the specific 

information that is claimed as CBI. In 

addition to one complete version of the 

comment that includes information 

claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment 

that does not contain the information 

claimed as CBI must be submitted for 

inclusion in the public docket. 

Information so marked will not be 

disclosed except in accordance with 

procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2. 

2. Tips for Preparing Your Comments. 

Your comments will be most helpful if 

you remember to: 

• Identify the action by docket 

number and other identifying 

information (subject heading, Federal 

Register date and page number). 

• Follow directions—The agency may 

ask you to respond to specific questions 

or organize comments by referencing a 

Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 

or section number. 

• Explain why you agree or disagree; 

suggest alternatives and substitute 

language for your requested changes. 

• Describe any assumptions and 

provide any technical information and/ 

or data that you used. 

• If you estimate potential costs or 

burdens, explain how you arrived at 

your estimate in sufficient detail to 

allow for it to be reproduced. 

• Provide specific examples to 

illustrate your concerns, and suggest 

alternatives. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 68 / Tuesday, April 10, 2007 / Notices 17903 

• Explain your views as clearly as 

possible, avoiding the use of profanity 

or personal threats. 

3. Timing. You must submit your 

comments by the comment period 

deadline identified above (see DATES). 

Abbreviations and Acronyms Used in 

the Notice 

ATP: Alternate Test Procedure 

CFR: Code of Federal Regulations 

EPA: Environmental Protection Agency 

MCL: Maximum Contaminant Level 

NPDWR: National Primary Drinking Water 

Regulations 

NSDWR: National Secondary Drinking Water 

Regulations 

SDWA: Safe Drinking Water Act 

UCMR: Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring 

Regulations 

U.S.C.: United States Code 

VCSB: Voluntary Consensus Standard Body 

Table of Contents 

I. General Information 

A. Does This Action Apply to Me? 

B. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My 

Comments for EPA? 

II. Background 

A. What Is the Purpose of This Notice? 

B. Statutory Background 

C. How Does EPA Currently Approve 

Testing Methods for Drinking Water 

Contaminants? 

III. Expedited Method Approval 

A. What Is Expedited Method Approval? 

B. Why Is EPA Implementing the 

Expedited Method Approval Process? 

C. Will EPA Use This Process to Approve 

All New Methods? 

D. Will EPA Also Use the New Expedited 

Process To Approve Alternative Methods 

for National Secondary Drinking Water 

Regulations and Unregulated 

Contaminants? 

E. Will EPA Use This Process To Withdraw 

Approval for Methods? 

F. How Often Will Methods Be Approved 

Using the Expedited Process? 

G. How Will I Know When a Method Is 

Approved Using the Expedited Process? 

H. Will There Be a Comprehensive List of 

All Methods Approved Using the 

Expedited Process? 

I. Will a Regulation Tell Me Where To Find 

the Comprehensive List of Methods 

Approved Using the Expedited Process? 

J. Will Regulatory Authorities Accept the 

Data Generated Using Methods 

Approved by the Expedited Approach? 

K. Where Can I Find Copies of the Methods 

Approved by This Process? 

L. Must My Laboratory Be Certified to Use 

these Methods? 

M. Are Any Particular Methods Currently 

Under Consideration for Approval Using 

the Expedited Process? 

IV. Request for Comment 

V. References 

II. Background 

This section provides the purpose of 

this action, a brief statutory background 

on approval of testing methods for 

drinking water contaminants, and a 

description of how EPA currently 

approves drinking water testing 

methods. 

A. What Is the Purpose of This Notice? 

This action explains the expedited 

process that EPA plans to implement for 

the approval of testing methods for 

drinking water contaminants and seeks 

comments on specific aspects of the 

process. 

B. Statutory Background 

Analytical methods are approved by 

EPA to support three types of drinking 

water monitoring. Under the Safe 

Drinking Water Act (SDWA), EPA 

promulgates national primary drinking 

water regulations (NPDWRs) that 

specify maximum contaminant levels 

(MCLs) or treatment techniques for 

drinking water contaminants (SDWA 

section 1412 (42 U.S.C. 300g–1)). The 

NPDWRs apply to public water systems 

pursuant to SDWA section 1401(1)(A) 

(42 U.S.C. 300f(1)(A)). The NPDWRs 

include analytical testing methods that 

are used to measure compliance. Per 

SDWA section 1401(1)(D), NPDWRs 

include ‘‘* * * criteria and procedures 

to assure a supply of drinking water 

which dependably complies with such 

maximum contaminant levels; including 

accepted methods for quality control 

and testing procedures * * *’’ (42 

U.S.C. 300f(1)(D)). In addition, SDWA 

section 1445(a)(1) authorizes the 

Administrator to establish regulations 

for monitoring to help determine 

whether persons are acting in 

compliance with the requirements of 

SDWA (42 U.S.C. 300j–4). EPA’s 

promulgation of analytical methods for 

NPDWRs is authorized under these 

sections of SDWA as well as the general 

rulemaking authority in SDWA section 

1450(a) (42 U.S.C. 300j–9(a)). 

SDWA also authorizes EPA to 

promulgate national secondary drinking 

water regulations (NSDWRs) for 

contaminants in drinking water that 

primarily affect the aesthetic qualities 

relating to the public acceptance of 

drinking water (SDWA section 1412 (42 

U.S.C. 300g–1)). These regulations are 

not Federally enforceable but are 

guidelines for the States (40 CFR 143.1). 

The NSDWRs also include analytical 

techniques for determining compliance 

with the regulations (40 CFR 143.4). 

EPA’s promulgation of analytical 

methods for NSDWRs is authorized 

under general rulemaking authority in 

SDWA section 1450(a) (42 U.S.C. 300j–

9(a)). 

Section 1445(a)(2) of the Act gives 

EPA discretion in setting the process for 

approving analytical methods for 

unregulated contaminant monitoring. 

For consistency with the procedures for 

NPDWRs, EPA includes analytical 

methods in the unregulated 

contaminant monitoring regulations 

(UCMRs). 

In the 1996 Amendments to SDWA, 

Section 1401(1) states the following: ‘‘At 

any time after promulgation of a 

regulation referred to in this paragraph, 

the Administrator may add equally 

effective quality control and testing 

procedures by guidance published in 

the Federal Register. Such procedures 

shall be treated as an alternative for 

public water systems to the quality 

control and testing procedures listed in 

the regulation.’’ By this action, EPA is 

stating that it plans to use this authority 

to develop an expedited process for 

establishing alternative testing methods 

for previously promulgated methods. 

Under this approach, EPA will publish 

a notice in the Federal Register rather 

than using a notice-and-comment 

rulemaking process to approve the use 

of alternative testing methods for 

existing regulations. 

C. How Does EPA Currently Approve 

Testing Methods for Drinking Water 

Contaminants? 

When EPA establishes a monitoring 

requirement for a drinking water 

contaminant, the Agency also specifies 

at least one reference analytical method 

that can be used to determine the 

contaminant’s concentration in drinking 

water. Public water systems must 

currently use a testing method listed in 

the regulation when performing 

analyses of samples to demonstrate 

compliance or for use in unregulated 

contaminant monitoring. 

Methods that are incorporated into 

the regulation are approved through a 

rulemaking process. In general, this 

means that EPA publishes a proposed 

rule, citing the method along with a 

discussion of how the method can be 

used to analyze samples. The method is 

proposed for approval in conjunction 

with monitoring requirements for one or 

more specific contaminants. EPA 

solicits public comment. After 

consideration of the comments, EPA 

decides whether to approve the method. 

If the method is deemed suitable, it is 

included in a final rule. The method is 

not approved for analysis of compliance 

or UCMR samples until it is referenced 

in a final rule. 

EPA examines the performance 

characteristics of methods prior to 

proposing them in a regulation. In order 

for a method to be considered for 

approval, EPA generally requires that it 

meet a number of criteria, including the 

following: 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
17904 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 68 / Tuesday, April 10, 2007 / Notices 

• It must be applicable to routine 

analyses of samples. 

• The method must be suitable for 

measuring the drinking water 

contaminant in the concentration range 

of interest. 

• The accuracy and precision of the 

method must be such that data can be 

used to demonstrate compliance with 

the MCL or meet UCMR monitoring 

objectives in a wide variety of drinking 

water matrices. 

• The method should include 

instructions for all aspects of the 

analysis from sample collection to data 

reporting. 

• Appropriate quality control criteria 

should be incorporated so that 

acceptable method performance is 

demonstrated during the analysis of 

samples. 

EPA attempts to approve multiple 

analytical methods for each 

contaminant in order to provide public 

water systems with flexibility in 

meeting their compliance or 

unregulated contaminant monitoring 

requirements. EPA also incorporates as 

much flexibility as is practical into 

reference methods that EPA develops 

itself. Subsequent to the establishment 

of monitoring requirements, EPA 

continues to evaluate additional 

analytical methods as they become 

available. New methods may be 

submitted to EPA through the Alternate 

Test Procedure (ATP) program or from 

Voluntary Consensus Standard Bodies 

(VCSBs) such as Standard Methods or 

ASTM International. Additional 

methods may also be developed by EPA 

or EPA may revise existing methods to 

incorporate improvements in 

technology, minimize use of hazardous 

solvents, or reduce the cost of the 

analysis. To date, when new or revised 

testing methods were deemed suitable 

for analyzing compliance or UCMR 

samples, EPA approved them through 

the rulemaking process (i.e., by 

soliciting public comments through a 

rule proposal and issuing a final rule 

after taking those comments into 

consideration). EPA periodically issues 

method update rules in order to approve 

additional testing methods. 

III. Expedited Method Approval 

A. What Is Expedited Method Approval? 

Section 1401(1)(D) of SDWA, as 

amended in 1996, authorizes EPA to 

approve alternative testing methods 

outside the normal notice-and-comment 

rulemaking process. To use this 

expedited process, EPA must already 

have promulgated at least one analytical 

testing method for the contaminant in 

question through the normal rulemaking 

process. Once EPA has approved one 

testing method through the rulemaking 

process, section 1401(1)(D) allows EPA 

to approve additional (alternative) 

testing methods for the same 

contaminant through an expedited 

process that simply involves publishing 

the alternative method in the Federal 

Register. To use this expedited process, 

EPA must first find that the alternative 

testing method is ‘‘equally effective’’ as 

the method that was approved through 

rulemaking. 

EPA will examine the performance 

characteristics of each new method 

being considered for approval using the 

expedited process in the same manner 

as is currently used when promulgating 

a method by regulation. The method 

will be evaluated on the basis of its 

selectivity, bias, precision, quantitation 

range and detection characteristics. In 

general, quality control procedures and 

criteria must be available to provide an 

on-going demonstration of method 

performance during the analysis of 

samples. 

After a method is demonstrated to be 

suitable for analyzing compliance or 

unregulated contaminant monitoring 

samples for a specific contaminant, and 

EPA deems it to be ‘‘equally effective’’

as the originally promulgated method, 

EPA will publish a notice in the Federal 

Register to announce that 

determination. Because the rulemaking 

process will not be used, the alternative 

method will not be cited in the drinking 

water regulations (which are contained 

at 40 CFR Part 141). Only the originally 

promulgated method will continue to be 

cited in that manner. However, 

alternative methods approved using the 

expedited process will be fully available 

to public water systems for compliance 

or unregulated contaminant monitoring 

and reporting to the same extent as the 

methods that were approved through 

the normal rulemaking process. 

B. Why Is EPA Implementing the 

Expedited Method Approval Process? 

EPA encourages the development of 

new measurement technologies and the 

improvement of traditional analytical 

techniques. These advances often result 

in benefits such as shorter analysis 

times, minimized use of solvents, 

greater specificity in the analytical 

results, or more robust analytical 

procedures that are less prone to quality 

control failures. The benefits can lead to 

more cost effective monitoring. 

The expedited method approval 

process will improve EPA’s ability to 

make new technologies and improved 

analytical techniques available in a 

timely manner. Under the current 

process, after a method is shown to be 

suitable for analyzing drinking water 

compliance or unregulated contaminant 

monitoring samples, it cannot be used 

for that purpose until the rulemaking 

process is completed. The traditional 

rulemaking process in some cases can 

take two to three or more years to 

complete. This means the method is not 

available for monitoring for several 

years. Under the expedited process 

described in this notice, the method will 

be available as soon as EPA publishes a 

Federal Register notice announcing that 

the method can be used for analyzing 

drinking water compliance or UCMR 

samples. EPA anticipates most 

alternative methods will be approved in 

this manner within six to eight months 

after they are determined to be 

applicable to the analysis of compliance 

or UCMR samples. 

C. Will EPA Use This Process To 

Approve All New Methods? 

As stated above, EPA will use the 

expedited methods approval process 

only to approve additional testing 

methods for contaminants for which 

EPA has already promulgated 

regulations, including at least one 

analytical method. 

EPA anticipates that the expedited 

process will be the primary mechanism 

used to approve additional testing 

methods. EPA expects to use this 

process to approve new or revised 

methods from sources such as: 

• VCSBs, such as Standard Methods 

or ASTM International; 

• Vendors who have submitted new 

technologies or methods to the ATP 

program; and 

• EPA or other governmental 

organizations. 

There may be instances in which EPA 

will seek public comment prior to 

approving a new or revised method 

because additional information is 

needed. In those cases, EPA will 

consider whether to still approve the 

new or revised method through the 

expedited process described in this 

notice or use the normal rulemaking 

process. 

D. Will EPA Also Use the New 

Expedited Process To Approve 

Alternative Methods for National 

Secondary Drinking Water Regulations 

and Unregulated Contaminants? 

Yes. In addition to using the 

expedited process with respect to 

NPDWRs, EPA plans to use the 

expedited process to approve additional 

test methods for national secondary 

drinking water regulations and 

unregulated contaminants as well. In 

both cases, there will need to be at least 

one test method that EPA has already 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 68 / Tuesday, April 10, 2007 / Notices 17905 

specified and promulgated by 

regulation, and EPA will approve the 

alternative methods only upon finding 

that they are equally as effective as the 

specified method. 

National secondary drinking water 

regulations, which are contained in 40 

CFR Part 143, are not enforceable but 

are intended as guidelines for States. 

Analytical methods are specified in 

these guidelines at 40 CFR 143.4. EPA 

will use the expedited process to add 

any alternative methods that are equally 

as effective as the methods set forth in 

the guidelines. 

For unregulated contaminants, under 

the authority of Section 1445(a)(2) of 

SDWA, EPA promulgates regulations 

that specify monitoring requirements, 

including analytical methods. See 40 

CFR 141.40. Section 1445(a) gives EPA 

discretion in setting the process for 

approving analytical methods for the 

unregulated contaminants. For 

consistency with the procedures for 

NPDWRs, and given Congress’s clear 

intent to expedite the process for adding 

analytical methods as new methods 

become available, EPA intends to use 

these expedited procedures to add 

methods for the unregulated 

contaminants as well. 

E. Will EPA Use This Process To 

Withdraw Approval for Methods? 

Under certain conditions, it may be 

necessary for EPA to withdraw approval 

of a testing method. For example, if an 

MCL is lowered to better protect public 

health, a method that was suitable for 

demonstrating compliance with the 

higher MCL may no longer have the 

necessary sensitivity. There may also be 

instances in which an approved method 

becomes obsolete because it uses 

hazardous reagents or fails to meet the 

performance characteristics of other 

approved methods. 

EPA will not use the expedited 

process described in this notice to 

withdraw approval of any method that 

EPA originally approved through the 

rulemaking process. In that case, EPA 

will again use the rulemaking process to 

withdraw approval for such testing 

methods when necessary. 

However, the new process will be 

used to withdraw approval of any 

method that was initially approved 

using the expedited process. EPA will 

withdraw approval of such a method by 

publishing a Federal Register notice 

describing EPA’s rationale for the 

withdrawal and stipulating an effective 

date for the action. 

F. How Often Will Methods Be 

Approved Using the Expedited Process? 

EPA intends to use the expedited 

approval process in such a manner that 

methods are approved as soon as 

possible after they are determined to be 

suitable for analyzing drinking water 

compliance or UCMR samples. The 

frequency will depend on the number of 

methods that are awaiting approval and 

the urgency for that approval. For 

example, EPA may approve a single 

method using this process if exercising 

the expedited method could 

significantly benefit the public by 

reducing monitoring costs while 

maintaining data quality. Currently, 

EPA expects that the process will be 

implemented at least annually and that 

it will normally involve approval of 

multiple methods. 

G. How Will I Know When a Method Is 

Approved Using the Expedited Process? 

EPA will publish a notice in the 

Federal Register to announce the 

expedited method approvals. At a 

minimum, the notice will list the new 

method(s) being approved, the 

contaminant(s) for which each method 

approval is granted, a reference to the 

regulation that cites the reference 

method(s) for each contaminant, and 

information concerning where a copy of 

each method can be obtained. 

EPA is also considering whether 

additional information should be 

included in the Federal Register notice. 

When EPA proposes approval of new 

methods using the regulatory process, 

the preamble to the proposed rule 

usually contains a brief description of 

the method, a summary of the method 

performance characteristics, and a 

discussion of the basis for the 

approval(s). The information is 

presented to better inform the reader so 

that public comment can be obtained. 

Under the expedited process, EPA does 

not anticipate publishing this particular 

information. However, EPA is using this 

Federal Register notice to solicit 

comment on the type of information that 

would be useful to the public and 

regulated entities when new methods 

are approved using the expedited 

process. 

H. Will There Be a Comprehensive List 

of All Methods Approved Using the 

Expedited Process? 

EPA plans to maintain a 

comprehensive list of methods 

approved through the expedited 

process. The public availability of the 

list is one of the subjects EPA is 

soliciting comment on in this notice. 

EPA anticipates that State agencies, 

public water systems, and laboratories 

will want access to a comprehensive list 

to simplify the tracking of method 

approvals listed in multiple Federal 

Register notices. 

EPA is requesting input on whether a 

comprehensive list should be provided 

and if so, the mechanism for making it 

available. One option would be to list 

the methods in the Code of Federal 

Regulations (CFR) as an appendix to the 

drinking water regulations. A revised 

hard copy edition of the CFR is printed 

once per year, but it is continually 

updated electronically throughout the 

year and is available to the public 

through the Internet at http:// 

ecfr.gpoaccess.gov. So, while the CFR 

hard copy would generally contain an 

up-to-date list of methods, it would not 

show methods that have been added 

since the previous published update. 

A second option would be to list the 

methods on an EPA Web site. EPA 

would update the Web page each time 

a new method is approved. Under this 

option, the Federal Register notice 

would list the new method approvals 

and refer the public to the Web site for 

a complete listing of methods approved 

under the expedited process. The Web 

site could either show the list or provide 

a link for downloading a fact sheet with 

the list in an electronic format. 

A third option would be to make the 

list available through the Safe Drinking 

Water Hotline or through an Agency 

designated contact for those who do not 

have Internet access. 

A fourth option would combine some 

or all of the above approaches by listing 

the methods in an appendix to the CFR, 

on the Internet, and/or in a fact sheet 

available from the Agency. 

I. Will a Regulation Tell Me Where To 

Find the Comprehensive List of Methods 

Approved Using the Expedited Process? 

The current regulations at 40 CFR 

Parts 141 and 143 do not contain any 

information about where methods 

approved using the expedited process 

would be listed. EPA does not plan to 

immediately change the regulatory text 

when the expedited method approval 

process is implemented. If it would be 

helpful to add a cross-referencing 

statement in the NPDWRs, NSDWRs, 

and/or UCMRs, referring to a list of the 

methods approved using the expedited 

process so that regulated entities and 

the public could more easily find the 

information, EPA may consider such a 

change to the regulations in future 

actions. 

One option would be to add a 

paragraph at 40 CFR 141.27, since this 

section deals with approval of alternate 

analytical techniques. The paragraph 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
17906 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 68 / Tuesday, April 10, 2007 / Notices 

might state, ‘‘The methods listed in 

(location of list, per Section III.H, 

inserted here) may be used as 

alternatives to the methods listed in the 

NPDWRs, NSDWRs, and UCMR.’’

A second option would be to add a 

footnote to each table of approved 

methods in the NPDWRs, NSDWRs and/ 

or UCMR (i.e., 40 CFR 141.21(f)(3), 

141.23(k)(1), 141.24(e), 141.25(a), 

141.40, 141.74(a)(1), 141.131(b), (c), and 

(d) and 143.3(b)). 

EPA is requesting comment on 

whether adding the location of the 

comprehensive list to future regulatory 

text is warranted, and if so, where that 

information should be added. 

J. Will Regulatory Authorities Accept the 

Data Generated Using Methods 

Approved by the Expedited Approach? 

In States, territories, and tribes in 

which EPA has primacy (which 

includes Wyoming, the District of 

Columbia, and all Indian lands except 

the Navajo), when EPA approves an 

alternative analytical method through 

the expedited process, a facility will 

generally be able to use either that new 

method or the originally promulgated 

method to meet its regulatory 

requirements for compliance or 

unregulated contaminant monitoring 

and reporting (although there may be 

State or local restrictions). Note that if 

a laboratory chooses to use a method 

approved under the expedited process, 

it must adhere to the written procedures 

described in the method and meet all 

the quality control criteria that are 

specified, just as it would for a method 

approved via regulation. 

Where the State, territory or tribe has 

primacy (which, for States and 

territories, is in most cases), it is up to 

the State, territory, or tribe to decide 

whether to allow the use of alternative 

analytical methods that have been 

approved by EPA and, if allowed, the 

process for adopting those new methods 

within its own program. Since these 

decisions will vary from State to State, 

facilities will need to be aware of their 

Primacy Agency’s own requirements 

prior to using an alternative method that 

EPA has approved under the expedited 

method approval process. Primacy 

Agencies are invited to provide 

comment on how methods approved 

under this new procedure will be 

implemented in their programs and if 

there are concerns that EPA can address 

when implementing this new approval 

process (in order to simplify or expedite 

Primacy Agency acceptance of the 

alternative methods). 

K. Where Can I Find Copies of the 

Methods Approved by This Process? 

The Federal Register notice 

announcing the approval of methods 

under the expedited process will 

include information concerning where 

the complete methods can be obtained. 

This information will also be included 

with the comprehensive list of methods 

approved under the expedited process. 

A docket will be created each time 

EPA announces approval of methods 

under the expedited process and a copy 

of each method will be placed in the 

docket. All documents in the docket 

will be listed in the 

www.regulations.gov index. Publicly 

available docket materials, excluding 

copyrighted materials, will be available 

electronically in www.regulations.gov 

and in hard copy at the Water Docket. 

Copyrighted materials will only be 

available in hard copy at the Water 

Docket. 

L. Must My Laboratory Be Certified to 

Use These Methods? 

If the originally promulgated 

regulation requires that the laboratory 

be certified to perform analyses of 

compliance samples for a specific 

contaminant, then EPA plans to extend 

this requirement to use of methods 

approved through the expedited 

process. Similarly, if a ‘‘party approved 

by the State’’ is specified in the 

regulation, then EPA plans to extend 

this requirement to use of the alternative 

method. 

M. Are Any Particular Methods 

Currently Under Consideration for 

Approval Using the Expedited Process? 

In an effort to assist the public in 

understanding the expedited approval 

process, EPA is providing two examples 

of methods that are being considered for 

approval using this process. Approval is 

not being granted in this notice, but EPA 

anticipates approving them when the 

process is ultimately implemented. 

They are included herein so that the 

public can comment on the format of 

the listing and the type of information 

presented on each method. 

1. EPA Method 200.5, Revision 4.2. 

Determination of Trace Elements in 

Drinking Water by Axially Viewed 

Inductively Coupled Plasma-Atomic 

Emission Spectrometry (USEPA, 2003) 

Axially viewed inductively coupled 

plasma-atomic emission spectrometry 

can be used to determine concentrations 

of several trace elements and water 

matrix elements in drinking water. The 

performance characteristics of EPA 

Method 200.5, Revision 4.2 were 

compared to the characteristics of the 

methods listed at 40 CFR 141.23(k)(1) 

for the same contaminants. Based on 

this evaluation, EPA expects that it will 

be able to deem this method to be 

equally effective as the promulgated 

methods for determining antimony, 

arsenic, barium, beryllium, cadmium, 

chromium, copper, lead, and selenium 

concentrations. Therefore, EPA 

anticipates approving this method when 

the Expedited Approval Process is 

implemented in a future Federal 

Register notice (but again, EPA is not 

approving this method today). 

EPA Method 200.5, Revision 4.2, can 

be accessed and downloaded directly 

on-line at http://www.epa.gov/ 

nerlcwww/ordmeth.htm. 

2. Standard Method 6610–04. HighPerformance Liquid Chromatographic 

Method for Carbamate Pesticides 

(APHA, 2004) 

High-performance liquid 

chromatography with post-column 

derivatization and fluorescence 

detection can be used to determine the 

concentrations of carbamate pesticides 

in drinking water. Standard Method 

6610–04 is based on EPA Method 531.2 

(USEPA, 2001), which is approved for 

analyzing compliance samples for 

carbofuran and oxamyl (40 CFR 

141.24(e)(1)). Therefore, EPA expects 

that it will be able to deem Standard 

Method 6610–04 to be equally effective 

as the promulgated method for 

determining carbofuran and oxamyl 

concentrations in compliance samples. 

Thus, EPA anticipates approving this 

method when the Expedited Approval 

Process is implemented in a future 

Federal Register notice (but again, EPA 

is not approving this method today). 

Standard Method 6610 B–04 is 

available at http:// 

www.standardmethods.org. 

ALTERNATIVE ANALYTICAL METHODS UNDER CONSIDERATION FOR APPROVAL USING THE EXPEDITED APPROVAL PROCESS

Alternate method (being considered for approval) Alternate methodology Contaminant Citation for methods 

approved by regulation 

EPA Method 200.5, Revision 4.2 1 ..................................... AVICP-AES2 ....................... Antimony ............................. 40 CFR 141.23(k)(1) 

EPA Method 200.5, Revision 4.2 ....................................... AVICP-AES ......................... Arsenic ................................ 40 CFR 141.23(k)(1) 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 68 / Tuesday, April 10, 2007 / Notices 17907 

ALTERNATIVE ANALYTICAL METHODS UNDER CONSIDERATION FOR APPROVAL USING THE EXPEDITED APPROVAL

PROCESS—Continued 

Alternate method (being considered for approval) Alternate methodology Contaminant Citation for methods 

approved by regulation 

EPA Method 200.5, Revision 4.2 ....................................... AVICP-AES ......................... Barium ................................. 40 CFR 141.23(k)(1) 

EPA Method 200.5, Revision 4.2 ....................................... AVICP-AES ......................... Beryllium .............................. 40 CFR 141.23(k)(1) 

EPA Method 200.5, Revision 4.2 ....................................... AVICP-AES ......................... Cadmium ............................. 40 CFR 141.23(k)(1) 

EPA Method 200.5, Revision 4.2 ....................................... AVICP-AES ......................... Calcium ............................... 40 CFR 141.23(k)(1) 

EPA Method 200.5, Revision 4.2 ....................................... AVICP-AES ......................... Chromium ............................ 40 CFR 141.23(k)(1) 

EPA Method 200.5, Revision 4.2 ....................................... AVICP-AES ......................... Copper ................................. 40 CFR 141.23(k)(1) 

EPA Method 200.5, Revision 4.2 ....................................... AVICP-AES ......................... Lead .................................... 40 CFR 141.23(k)(1) 

EPA Method 200.5, Revision 4.2 ....................................... AVICP-AES ......................... Magnesium .......................... 40 CFR 141.23(k)(1) 

EPA Method 200.5, Revision 4.2 ....................................... AVICP-AES ......................... Selenium ............................. 40 CFR 141.23(k)(1) 

EPA Method 200.5, Revision 4.2 ....................................... AVICP-AES ......................... Silica .................................... 40 CFR 141.23(k)(1) 

EPA Method 200.5, Revision 4.2 ....................................... AVICP-AES ......................... Sodium ................................ 40 CFR 141.23(k)(1) 

Standard Method 6610–04 3 .............................................. HPLC4 ................................. Carbofuran .......................... 40 CFR 141.23(k)(1) 

Standard Method 6610–04 ................................................. HPLC ................................... Oxamyl ................................ 40 CFR 141.23(k)(1) 

1EPA Method 200.5, Revision 4.2, ‘‘Determination of Trace Elements in Drinking Water by Axially Viewed Inductively Coupled Plasma-Atomic 

Emission Spectrometry,’’ USEPA, October 2003, EPA/600/R–06/115 can be accessed and downloaded directly on-line at http://www.epa.gov/ 

nerlcwww/ordmeth.htm. 2Axially viewed inductively coupled plasma-atomic emission spectrometry (AVICP–AES). 3 Carbamate Pesticides—High-Performance Liquid Chromatographic Method. The Standard Method Online version that is approved is indicated by the last two digits in the method number which is the year of approval by the Standard Methods Committee. Standard Methods Online 

is available at http://www.standardmethods.org. 4 High-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) in conjunction with a post-column derivatization system and a fluorescence detector. 

IV. Request for Comment 

EPA seeks comments on several 

aspects in the implementation of the 

expedited methods approval process. 

The information and comments 

submitted in response to this notice will 

be considered in determining the final 

details of the implementation process. 

Specifically, EPA seeks comments on 

the following: 

1. EPA requests comment on whether 

a comprehensive list of methods 

approved under the expedited process 

should be publicly maintained. If such 

a list is desirable, then how should EPA 

make it available? 

• As an appendix in the CFR; 

• On an EPA Web page; 

• As a table or fact sheet available 

from an EPA designated contact; 

• Using a combination of these 

approaches or other suggestions. 

2. EPA requests comment on the type 

of information that should be included 

in the Federal Register notice when 

new method approvals are published 

using the expedited process. Is a list of 

the methods being approved sufficient 

or should the notice include additional 

information? If additional information is 

suggested, please indicate the types of 

information that are desirable and why. 

3. EPA requests comment concerning 

the usefulness of amending future 

regulatory text to describe where a list 

of methods approved using the 

expedited process can be obtained. If 

such a change is desired, should a 

reference to the list be included: 

• With each methods table; 

• In 40 CFR 141.27 under Alternate 

Test Methods. 

• Is there a better suggestion? 

4. EPA requests comment on the 

format of the table that lists methods 

approved using the expedited approval 

process. Does the example provided in 

this notice provide enough information 

in a usable format or are there better 

suggestions for listing the information? 

5. EPA invites Primacy Agencies to 

comment on how methods approved 

under this new procedure will be 

implemented in their programs and if 

there are concerns that EPA can address 

when implementing this new approval 

process (in order to simplify or expedite 

Primacy Agency acceptance of the 

alternative methods). 

V. References 

American Public Health Association (APHA). 

2004. Standard Method 6610–04. 

Carbamate Pesticides—HighPerformance Liquid Chromatographic 

Method. Standard Methods Online. 

(Available at http:// 

www.standardmethods.org.) 

USEPA. 2001. EPA Method 531.2. 

Measurement of Nmethylcarbamoyloximes and Nmethylcarbamates in Water by Direct 

Aqueous Injection HPLC with 

Postcolumn Derivatization. Revision 1.0. 

EPA 815–B–01–002. (Available at http:// 

www.epa.gov/safewater/methods/ 

sourcalt.html.) 

USEPA. 2003. EPA Method 200.5. 

Determination of Trace Elements in 

Drinking Water by Axially Viewed 

Inductively Coupled Plasma-Atomic 

Emission Spectrometry. Revision 4.2. 

EPA/600/R–06/115. (Available at http:// 

www.epa.gov/nerlcwww/ordmeth.htm.) 

Dated: March 30, 2007. 

Benjamin H. Grumbles, 

Assistant Administrator, Office of Water. 

[FR Doc. E7–6726 Filed 4–9–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY 

COMMISSION 

Sunshine Act Meeting Notice 

AGENCY HOLDING THE MEETING: Equal 

Employment Opportunity Commission. 

DATE AND TIME: Tuesday, April 17, 2007, 

9:30 a.m. Eastern Time. 

PLACE: Clarence M. Mitchell, Jr. 

Conference Room on the Ninth Floor of 

the EEOC Office Building, 1801 ‘‘L’’

Street, NW., Washington, DC 20507. 

STATUS: The meeting will be open to the 

public. 

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: 

OPEN SESSION: 

1. Announcement of Notation Votes, 

2. Perspectives on Work/Family 

Balance and the Federal Equal 

Employment Opportunity Laws, and 

3. Headquarters Project Management 

and Relocation Services Contract. 

Note: In accordance with the Sunshine Act, 

the meeting will be open to public 

observation of the Commission’s 

deliberations and voting. (In addition to 

publishing notices on EEOC Commission 

meetings in the Federal Register, the 

Commission also provides a recorded 

announcement a full week in advance on 

future Commission sessions.) 

Please telephone (202) 663–7100 

(voice) and (202) 663–4074 (TTY) at any 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES